... is because some people are irredeemably evil

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/03/21/torture.slaying.ap/index.html

3/22/2008 5:09:43 PM

On principal I'm opposed to the death penalty because I don't like the state having an institution in place that ends life when people fuck up.

But I'll often hear about crimes and wish that the cops would just take the perp out back and put a bullet in their head.

3/22/2008 5:14:53 PM

Agreed.

I don't support the death penalty for 99% of crimes, but this sort of behavior requires a hanging.

3/22/2008 5:15:18 PM

[old]

But I agree with you

/message_topic.aspx?topic=519347

[Edited on March 22, 2008 at 5:21 PM. Reason : .]

3/22/2008 5:21:13 PM

I can't think of a single instance in which I support the State killing another human being.

3/22/2008 5:28:58 PM

I can


* this one

3/22/2008 5:31:24 PM

Quote :

"is because some people are irredeemably evil"

Unlikely. With current tech, maybe. But things are changing.

3/22/2008 5:53:27 PM

Transhumanism can't solve everything.

3/22/2008 6:31:21 PM

The brain's just another machine.

With advanced enough tech, I'm sure we could turn psychopaths into paragons of virtue.

If that sounds unethical, we have many other options.

In any case, the idea of irredeemably evil people strikes me as unscientific.

3/22/2008 6:35:54 PM

Regardless of whether you can rehabilitate someone, they're still irredeemable. I don't care if you could turn them into saints. These people don't deserve to live.

3/22/2008 6:54:44 PM

So it's a moral and emotional argument?

If we had amazing tech, you'd still want death?

3/22/2008 7:04:00 PM

Im for the death penalty. In fact when there is no doubt they did some awful crime, do it the same week.

3/22/2008 7:06:10 PM

Yes. Anyone capable of inflicting that upon another human being has no right to live, period. Your right to life is predicated on your respect of other people's right to life.

3/22/2008 7:06:58 PM

well, it's good to see that toturing the shit out of someone can bring all races and ages together

3/22/2008 7:08:44 PM

execution.

3/22/2008 8:31:29 PM

Quote :

"I can't think of a single instance in which I don't support the State killing another human being."

3/22/2008 10:43:26 PM

Quote :

"Your right to life is predicated on your respect of other people's right to life."

Agreed. This one calls for an execution by firing squad - charge the family for the bullet - and call it a job well done.

3/22/2008 10:53:56 PM

Unfortunately, a firing squad will be too merciful for this scourge.

3/22/2008 11:00:25 PM

In general I don't agree with the death penalty, but I can see the need for it in those rare instances. Some people are just so depraved and so dangerous to society that they have to be put out of everyone's misery.

3/22/2008 11:05:06 PM

^^ Not if your firing squad is using BBs. I've always been a fan of eye for an eye styles of capital punishment.

3/22/2008 11:08:13 PM

Once again GoldenViper is 100% correct.

3/23/2008 2:07:37 AM

once again, GoldenViper shows that he plays 100% too many MMORPGs

3/23/2008 3:26:07 AM

those who don't believe in evil are the luckiest of all

because they've never had to witness it firsthand.

3/23/2008 7:31:04 AM

^ well said.

3/23/2008 8:22:23 AM

What purpose does the execution serve? Vengeance?

If that were the case, would it not be better to just keep them alive and torture them?

3/23/2008 8:57:16 AM

Assurance. Anyone capable of doing that to a person is capable of doing it again. If they are dead, they can't do it again. And it's not like these people just commit murder 1 as their first ever crime. Most of the time these people have a long history of crime, they've had second, third, fourth and fifth chances.

3/23/2008 9:16:02 AM

Generally, we live in a country where that stuff doesnt show itself that often.

3/23/2008 9:23:51 AM

Quote :

"once again, GoldenViper shows that he plays 100% too many MMORPGs"

I've actually never played a MMORPG. Tabletop is my style, son.

You could say I read too much science fiction. That would at least be plausible and vaguely relevant. It's not as if I'm suggesting epic mounts to facilitate rehabilitation.

I don't care much about punishment. I would be all for turning murders peaceful. In many cases, this wouldn't require future technology. We'd mainly have to treat them decently. With others, we might have to wait for breakthroughs. While altering the brain without consent makes me uncomfortable, I'd rather fix murderers than kill them.

[Edited on March 23, 2008 at 10:07 AM. Reason : tabletop RPGs ftw]

3/23/2008 10:01:08 AM

Whatever is causing these people to be "evil" is obviously some brain defect (if not a "defect" in the case of an actual disorder, there's still some physical fact about their brains that makes them act this way). If we could fix it and they'd stop being evil, why not do that? I like how you all want to blame and praise people as if there's free will, but it's an extremely childish, antiquated way to view the world.

3/23/2008 11:28:28 AM

Quote :

"While altering the brain without consent makes me uncomfortable, I'd rather fix murderers than kill them."

We're in a recession, son. It's cheaper to kill them.

3/23/2008 12:51:38 PM

i'm all for intergalactic space travel... hell i'd even settle for flying cars.

3/23/2008 1:10:31 PM

Wanting people like this to die, and our Death Penalty system are not congruent with each other.

The death penalty system is a horrid concoction of our deeply flawed justice system. The fact that innocent people sitting on death row have been exonerated at the last second by DNA evidence should be absolutely mortifying to any human being with a sense of compassion for his fellow man. It is proof positive that the justice system makes mistakes. And killing someone innocent is a mistake that you can't undo.

3/23/2008 2:09:07 PM

^ true, but in this case (and other cases like this), there in incontrovertible proof.

so in solid cases such as this one, i say crucify these people.

3/23/2008 4:29:09 PM

if you take a life, your life should be taken.

3/23/2008 4:29:24 PM

Quote :

"i'm all for intergalactic space travel... hell i'd even settle for flying cars."

amen

3/23/2008 4:51:58 PM

Quote :

"The brain's just another machine. With advanced enough tech, I'm sure we could turn psychopaths into paragons of virtue."

Morally, how is completely altering someones personality any different than death?

3/23/2008 5:19:46 PM

That depends on how much of their personality remains. All manner of forces alter our personalities every day, albeit slightly. Influencing someone isn't the same as killing them. A compete brain format and rewrite could be considered equivalent.

Remember, some murderers want to be rehabilitated. People don't cease being people when they kill or torture others. They're still remarkably similar to you and me.

3/23/2008 5:25:54 PM

I would imagine that most people who want to be rehabilitated (assuming this isn't their first crime) would choose that path longer before they got to murder 1.

3/23/2008 5:28:23 PM

1.

Quote :

"On principal I'm opposed to the death penalty because I don't like the state having an institution in place that ends life when people fuck up. But I'll often hear about crimes and wish that the cops would just take the perp out back and put a bullet in their head."

Yeah, pretty much. Though since I support a consistent life ethic, I probably should back off on the second part. We've argued through the cost benefit reasons of the DP before, but my belief in divine retribution on principal keeps me from endorsing the DP. Some things are bigger than cost benefit. Lock him up and throw away the key, let the divine be the final judge.

2. I support flying cars and space colonies as a possible solution to climate change.

3/23/2008 5:40:10 PM

What about folks like James Hamm?

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/10481

He killed another person in cold blood. In prison, he did his best to figure out what went wrong and change his life.

3/23/2008 6:11:35 PM

why even waste time and money with putting them in jail? put a bullet in each one of their heads at the scene of the crime. case closed.

3/23/2008 6:27:30 PM

why stop there? kill suspicious people before they have a chance to kill.

3/23/2008 7:58:37 PM

The problem with the death penalty is that it can't be applied fairly.

I typically don't oppose shit for moral reasons. Abortion is murder, and I'm okay with it. We shouldn't torture because it doesn't work, not because it's bad or wrong. And we shouldn't use the death penalty because it's impossible to apply it fairly.

3/23/2008 7:59:01 PM

Quote :

"true, but in this case (and other cases like this), there in incontrovertible proof. so in solid cases such as this one, i say crucify these people"

Our justice system doesn't have a distinction for people found guilty with incontrovertible proof, and maybe-theyre-not-really guilty proof.

What you're saying is that you feel it's acceptable for us to kill innocent people so that people like this can die. IOW, as Bridget is saying, it can't be applied fairly.

3/23/2008 8:11:43 PM

No, what I am saying is that when THERE is incontrovertible proof, the death penalty should be applied.

The distinction has to be made, because there IS a huge distinction.

3/23/2008 8:53:04 PM

Iin the eyes of the law, no one is ever convicted without incontrovertible proof. If we started convicting people with legally recognized controvertible proof, it would be extremely immoral and unethical.

3/23/2008 9:02:12 PM

^ okay, so let's look at the number of cases that got overturned when DNA evidence became available.

Our track record is fucking shit. This is why I don't support the death penalty in the majority of cases.

The the one-in-a-million where it's absolutely definite that they did it, and it was a completely despicable crime like this - roast 'em.

3/23/2008 9:05:51 PM

^ You're not understanding the dilemma.

How can we possibly set a standard of "REALLY ACTUALLY SUPER GUILTY" and "GUILTY" in the eyes of the law? It can't be done.

3/23/2008 9:09:57 PM

As someone who's worked with PRA before, I can say that regardless of what the legal system mandates itself as, certainties can be assigned to most anything.

You're right, practically, this may be impossible in our legal system - if that's the case I would not advocate the death penalty for anyone. But damn, for some crimes we see, society essentially KNOWS the person is guilty.

[Edited on March 23, 2008 at 9:26 PM. Reason : ]

3/23/2008 9:25:26 PM

Well, with the right jury, for the right cause a vigilante can get away with anything

3/23/2008 10:09:14 PM